FET Wiki page mentions British polar explorer Sir James Clark Ross discovery of the 'Ice Wall' in 1841. In FET the Antarctic is this Ice Wall that is effectively the circumference of the planetary disk. That is how I interpret the monopole map of the flat Earth.
Away from the FET Wiki page there is further information about Ross' Antarctic expedition where he discovered the Ross Sea. Various websites refer to the 'Ice Wall' as the Ross Ice Shelf and show it as forming just a relatively small part of the continental boundary of eastern Antarctica. There are other ice shelves of course and these in combination form other regions of the continental boundary of the Antarctic land mass.
The more recent (1911) mission to the South Pole by the Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen included a traverse of the Ross Ice Shelf followed by a passage across the Transantarctic mountains to reach the geographic South Pole. Amundsen used the eastern barrier regions of the Ice Shelf as a base or HQ for his mission. A couple of years before Amundsen the British Explorer Ernest Shackelton also traversed the Ice Shelf to a point beyond the 88 degrees south latitude line to get within 112 miles of the South Pole.
thing to say on this?So it seems that thanks to these missions - which are widely documented - the claim by FET Wiki that 'what lies beyond the 150ft ice wall is anyones guess', though perhaps true at the time of James Ross' mission is now no longer the case. I wonder why there is no mention of either Amundsen or Shackleton in FET Wiki?
60 views so far but no replies... has no one got an answer for this?
The whole idea that the Antarctic is closed and inaccessible is totally incorrect. Just look on the internet for all the expeditions (100s) that have taken place. You have had people walking, skiing, biking, driving, & flying across the Antarctic continent. There was even an account of a guy who was partly disabled, couldn't walk, and had to push himself to the South Pole. The whole idea that there's any wall out there is not a viable option. In fact the South Pole has been approached from multiple directions and no one has found an edge. Without any kind of an edge, wall, or barrier of some kind the whole idea of a flat earth is completely unsupportable.However you might want to search 'antarctica closed' on YouTube for a sense of what is out there.
I have seen that YouTube video. Yes, there are some restrictions. They make sense. You can easily die there. I wouldn't want to go there without doing a lot of planning so I could come back alive. For sure that can be done. My sister & her husband did that last year and it worked out OK. The point that I'm making is that there have been 1000's of people in and out of the Antarctic from all directions and no edge has been found. Therefore no edge can exist.What about the video below? The objection is that your sister and husband went to a kind of visitor centre.
The idea that Antarctica has to be inaccessible under FET is a weird thing that so many REers insist on criticising even when it's a totally unnecessary part of a model. Honestly I blame that for why it's stuck around so much; people end up needing to invest so much time and energy into defending it from some of the bad arguments levelled against it that it's psychologically near-impossible to recognise the valid objections in among the messes.I would note in respect to your last point, even the (previously stated) most 'up-to-date' model of the FE endorsed by TFES has Antarctica as its own continent. The idea is in the wiki under the 'bi-polar' model. It might have other issues at various locations, but Antarctica is not one of them.
The classic FET response would be twofold; there are two entities being confused here. One is the edge of the Earth, the ice wall, the icy limit of where it is we can go. The second is an icy landmass chosen to put stations on, perhaps simply because it's believed to be the Antarctica referred to by RET, or perhaps out of an active attempt to mislead. That can be crossed, circumnavigated, etc etc, no problem. The only thing that's really testable is the magnetic south pole, which isn't even claimed to be on the land itself. The former is the 'actual' South Pole, the latter is merely what RET claims is such.
Then there are those like me that see no reason to suppose both poles cannot exist as distinct points on a flat world.
Might I suggest that flights from Australia or New Zealand to Hawaii of the USA might have problems on any continental layout with a break down the International Dateline or the Equator.The idea that Antarctica has to be inaccessible under FET is a weird thing that so many REers insist on criticising even when it's a totally unnecessary part of a model. Honestly I blame that for why it's stuck around so much; people end up needing to invest so much time and energy into defending it from some of the bad arguments levelled against it that it's psychologically near-impossible to recognise the valid objections in among the messes.I would note in respect to your last point, even the (previously stated) most 'up-to-date' model of the FE endorsed by TFES has Antarctica as its own continent. The idea is in the wiki under the 'bi-polar' model. It might have other issues at various locations, but Antarctica is not one of them.
The classic FET response would be twofold; there are two entities being confused here. One is the edge of the Earth, the ice wall, the icy limit of where it is we can go. The second is an icy landmass chosen to put stations on, perhaps simply because it's believed to be the Antarctica referred to by RET, or perhaps out of an active attempt to mislead. That can be crossed, circumnavigated, etc etc, no problem. The only thing that's really testable is the magnetic south pole, which isn't even claimed to be on the land itself. The former is the 'actual' South Pole, the latter is merely what RET claims is such.
Then there are those like me that see no reason to suppose both poles cannot exist as distinct points on a flat world.
(https://wiki.tfes.org/images/c/c2/Altmap.png) The Bi-polar Model reflects the work of many Zeteticists who diverged from Rowbotham's work | (https://www.dropbox.com/s/pkr9ue4feehx0st/2018-12-01%20Playback%20of%20Air%20New%20Zealand%20flight%20NZ10%20on%2001%20Dec%202018%20%28Aukland%20to%20Honolulu%29.jpg?dl=1) Playback of Air New Zealand flight NZ10 on 01 Dec 2018 (Aukland to Honolulu) |
Kickass Trips, Latitude Zero: Mike Horn’s Horizontal Solo Circumnavigation of the Globe at the Equator (https://kickasstrips.com/2014/05/latitude-zero-mike-horns-humanpowered-circumnavigation-of-the-globe-at-the-equator/)
Mike Horn is a South-African born Swiss explorer and adventurer who gained world fame in 2001 after completing a solo journey around the equator without motorized transport.
(https://kickasstrips.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Mike-Horn-Latitude-0-2.jpg)
After Ranulph Fiennes’ ‘vertical’ crossing of the world along longitude zero – aka the Greenwich Meridian – in his Transglobe expedition in 1982 (http://kickasstrips.com/?p=2107), Mike Horn accomplished the first ‘horizontal’ crossing of the world at Latitude zero – aka the Equator in 2001.
The 35-year-old South-African crossed the Atlantic Ocean, South America, the Pacific Ocean, the Indonesian islands, The Indian Ocean and Africa. All by himself, walking, rowing, sailing, biking, through jungles and tempests, through marshes and deserts. He left in June 1999 and came back to where he had started, one year and a half later. He had gone round the world following the equator.Quote from: Mike Horn“When I left, I thought I knew enough to go round the world this way. Now that I am back, I know that I don’t know enough to start again.”
(http://kickasstrips.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/route-map-Mike-Horn-Latitude-zero.jpg)
I did many trips across the Pacific from Southern California to China and Japan. The biPolar map would make that trip interesting. It would be interesting to see how the waypoints could be laid out for that trip. We never did see any walls at sea or anything that looked like an edge even after diverting all over the place to avoid getting into typhoons at sea.That sounds like the "Space/non-Space" explanation in Leo Ferrari's video "In Search of the Edge":
I did many trips across the Pacific from Southern California to China and Japan. The biPolar map would make that trip interesting. It would be interesting to see how the waypoints could be laid out for that trip. We never did see any walls at sea or anything that looked like an edge even after diverting all over the place to avoid getting into typhoons at sea.The layout works better for something like the 'infinitely repeating plane' or 'pacman' ideas. I never meant to present it as something that would hold up to intense scrutiny, simply pointing out TFES DID solve the issue of Antarctica, albeit by introducing other inconsistencies/problems.